Re: Returning a value from exec or a better solution

References	(2 earlier) <CAG5udOh1+oE4g9Frjp3pucbHUtWcN34KK35a-Xs2YqkZH9X5=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ6cK1ZSQJyPqOjU+TSR8mmsXWNoD9FJ2dvuQsAVEJHAWYrjHg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG5udOiOAge3uHrGSDTZ412GAg+CC-6u8iGOyJ0Lnf3HnwUVzA@mail.gmail.com> <Xns9F515822D92CrtwfreenetREMOVEcouk@80.91.229.10> <CAG5udOgxSmQrVOm+fPO_wsJsDLeR6jie0AgJFvauODd+2eA21g@mail.gmail.com>
Date	2011-08-30 22:05 +0100
Subject	Re: Returning a value from exec or a better solution
From	Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.582.1314738309.27778.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 30 August 2011 13:31, Jack Trades <jacktradespublic@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Rob Williscroft <rtw@rtw.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> > That's brilliant and works flawlessly.  Thank you very much!
>>
>> If an impementation (as you say up thread) can populate globals
>> or locals with whatever they want, then how do you know that last
>> item added was the function definition the user supplied ?

That's not an issue. The last statement that is executed will be the
"def" statement.

>> Rob.
>
> I spoke a bit too soon with the "works flawlessly" post.  In addition to
> your issue, there is also the problem that supplying an empty environment
> does not allow the user to call necessary functions (like scheme_eval).

You could simply prepend the function definition string with whatever
imports are needed.

-- 
Arnaud

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Returning a value from exec or a better solution Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-30 22:05 +0100

csiph-web